Tuesday, March 6, 2012

MIB III #2 and Johnny Depp

I feel rather silly about this, but I didn't realize there were actually, . . . "men in black" as a part of the UFO legend. Anyway, the releasing of this film, it's a big film in the sci-fi genre, is one of the reasons why I am going to continue (but wrapping up quickly) the examination of the 1950's sci-fi genre, because if we know the history of the genre, we will be able to understand what MIB III does differently and what it maintains. The second reason we will be continuing the sci-fi genre is Battleship, set for release this summer, and even John Carter being released this weekend (what I am going to try and do is get to the Thursday midnight showing, but it's possible I just won't be able to make that, but I will get to it Friday and get at least a preliminary post up on how to "read it").

Newest image of Johnny Depp inDark Shadows set for a May 11 release. Is it just me or he is looking a lot like Nosferatu? The long nails, the wide collar on the jacket and the tall collar on his shirt, makes him look like Max Shrek.

I haven't seen this film, and I don''t even know that I want to. Here is the trailer for We Have a Pope and, below, I am copying a review from Internet Movie Database that may provide a fair assessment of the film:

Uh,... if you want to watch a verified great film about the papal process instead, I would gladly vouch for the 1968 film In the Shoes of the Fisherman. The great Anthony Quinn plays a Russian bishop who has been a prisoner in Serbia under the Communists, the chairman played by the great Laurence Olivier. The Vatican gets him out and the great Oskar Werner comes to bring him to Rome where he meets the current pope, played by the great John Gielgud. So it's a great movie.
Here ist the review for We Have A Pope:

This particular movie is based on a very original idea. It has scenes that depict with vividness the process of Papal succession. It portrays the ambivalence and doubts of a man and a collective entity when faced with a weight of responsibility which is much greater than that expected to be shouldered by an average human being. It very well conveys the atmosphere in St Peter's Square among the multinational crowd of the faithful as they wait for the election of their new spiritual Father. But it has a flaw.

It promotes the idea that the collective entity known as the College of Cardinals, a team which along with the Pope rules the Roman Catholic Church, is a group of grown-up boys, simple and faithful, humbly devoted to the Pope. It is strange that an institution that numbered among its former Heads people such as the Borgias and the Medici, which has been responsible for such events such as the Crusades and has invented and controlled the Inquisition could be nowadays governed by a group of naive simpletons. Of course the Roman Catholic Church has promoted art and learning and has played a great role in the history of Europe and the World.

Still, an institution from which so much evil as well as so much good has sprung, does not in any sense done justice when its hierarchy is portrayed in such a manner. In that point I disagree with the reviewer that considers that the movie has a sympathetic portrayal of the Roman Catholic hierarchy. I think the portrayal of the hierarchy is far too simplistic and naive and gives the impression that even the professors of Hogwards in Harry Potter are a group of people that collectively possess more gravitas and serious purpose than the College of Cardinals. Neither the faithful nor the opponents of the Roman Catholic Church would find in this group either role models or worthy adversaries.

Excluding that flaw, which incapacitates the movie from been taken seriously as a depiction of the workings of the higher echelons of the Church bureaucracy, one can commend the views of the Vatican and of Rome it offers as well as the performance of the lead actors in the roles of the Supreme Pontiff and the Professor of Psychology.

There are definitely political and social reasons this film has been released (it came out nearly a year ago in Italy) but it appears that it's a good example of being just offensive enough that the faithful will probably pass it up and not being offensive enough for those who hate the Church to watch.

About Me

This blog is dedicated to the glory of Jesus Christ.
Email thoughts and comments to thefineartdiner@gmail.com.
Please note: there is never just one correct interpretation, and I know that, I just rarely mention it nowadays; please do not think that, just because I have chosen to post one interpretation over another, doesn't mean that I think my interpretation is exclusively correct or other positions not possible. I would also like to point out that, we are living in a very defined, volatile culture with dynamic politics at play on the international stage and, whether you like to admit it or not, those elements go into the creation of art, which is why I include the political elements in my interpretations.
Thank you, have a nice day.